MSNBC "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell" - Transcript: "President Trump's approval rating."
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
O`DONNELL: We are doing this because the Trump White House is now and always has been in chaos. Chaos described vividly in Michael Wolff`s book "Fire and Fury", and in Bob Woodward`s book "Fear." And very likely in what could be the most politically damaging book of all that could outsell all the rest of them, John Bolton`s next book, for which publishers, who are calculating their massive offers to John Bolton tonight, are probably using a working title of something like "I resigned," by John Bolton. There are important questions to be asked about the immediate effects of John Bolton`s departure from the White House. What does this mean for the Trump approach to North Korea? What does this mean for the Trump approach to Iran? What does this mean more generally to the national security apparatus of the Trump administration? And what might it mean for congressional investigators who might want to question John Bolton now that he is a private citizen? There is no one better positioned to handle those questions tonight than our first guest, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff. Congressman Schiff is a Democrat representing California`s 28th congressional district, which includes parts of Los Angeles, Pasadena, Burbank, and the San Fernando Valley. Chairman Schiff, thank you very much for joining us tonight. Really appreciate it.
REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): Great to be with you.
O`DONNELL: I want to get your reaction to the firing and/or resignation of John Bolton.
SCHIFF: Well, he never should have had the position to begin with. He lacks the temperament. He lacks the judgment. To really have that job, you`re supposed to be a facilitator, to help the president get to yes, to mediate the national security officials and help them provide the president with options. I remember when he was first named as nominee, one of my colleagues asked me, what did I think about Michael Bolton being named as national security adviser. And I said I think you mean John Bolton, Michael Bolton is a singer. But honestly, I think Michael Bolton would do a better job, I`d be comfortable with him. It was an astonishing choice. It was obviously not his first choice. It was his third candidate, fourth candidate, since one turned it down for national security adviser. But a bad choice from start to finish, although ironically he was right on a couple of things that were profound disagreements with the president. That is, if we can believe what Bolton has evidently been telling people, that he disagreed with the president`s approach to North Korea, which has been a debacle, and he disagreed with this reality TV effort to have a summit with the Taliban at Camp David. Those were both I think quite disastrous decisions by the president. We`re paying the price for it.
O`DONNELL: Well, there`s -- we`ll have to wait for John Bolton`s book to at least get his thorough version of this. But there`s also the question of how they agreed or disagreed on Iran and was John Bolton pushing for a military strike against Iran that the president then decided against?
SCHIFF: Well, you know, I can tell you, I participated with a meeting with the president in the cabinet and Mr. Bolton. He didn`t contribute at all to the conversation. And that may have been a reflection this was on the eve of the president`s decision to pull back from a strike on Iran. That may have been because the president didn`t particularly want to hear from him. But, you know, it`s certainly true that he has been very hawkish on Iran. I think he has held very dangerous views, dangerous positions on Iran. That he was probably among others in urging the president to withdraw from the JCPOA, which I think has had really significant adverse consequences for the country. So, on Iran, I think he has been a singularly bad influence on the president. But as we have seen in many other things and with many other cabinet officials, even though he had often disagreements apparently with the president, it didn`t stop him from serving as an enabler of this president, both in terms of the disastrous policy vis-a-vis North Korea and with respect to the Taliban summit, but also sticking to the president even when he at least purportedly had these profound differences.
O`DONNELL: What does it mean to your investigations in the intelligence committee that John Bolton is now a private citizen? Does that change in any way the possibility of obtaining testimony from him?
SCHIFF: Well, in theory it ought to make it easier if the -- if Bolton is outside the administration, he would be more accessible as a witness. But the practice of the administration has been to claim privilege over anything anyone might say at any time they were in the administration, even during the transition. So, yes, if you`re willing to cooperate, he could shed light, for example, on what was said during these private meetings between the president and Putin. Did the president try to hide interpreter notes? Was he excluded from these meetings for a reason? Was it ever communicated to him why the president wanted no witnesses in these conversations? Did he ever learn that the president was continuing to pursue Trump Tower? Were there some other illicit financial motivation? Were, you know -- were intelligence items discussed with Putin or other Russian officials that could cause U.S. intelligence secrets to be jeopardized? You know, he could certainly answer those questions. Whether he`d be willing to or whether we could overcome the White House opposition, I guess only time will tell.
O`DONNELL: And there`s been developments over the course of the August recess with members of the House adding their voices to the encouragement of an impeachment inquiry in the House of Representatives. This week, the Judiciary Committee will be having a vote that basically empowers the committee with all of the powers of an impeachment inquiry. What is your view of what the Judiciary Committee is doing? I know that as chairman of intelligence that you have your own shop to run. But do you support what`s happening this week in the judiciary committee?
SCHIFF: I do because the procedures that the Judiciary Committee is adopting will allow it to move more expeditiously. It will allow subcommittees to do some of the witness interviews. It will allow staff to do some of the questioning. Given just how much the administration is stonewalling Congress`s oversight, whatever practices and policies we need to adopt in our committees to expedite our investigation we should undertake. So, yes, I do support what they`re doing. I think it will help us get answers more quickly.
O`DONNELL: And I want to get your reaction to the reporting we`ve seen this week here at NBC News and at other news organizations about a Russian spy, a spy who was serving American interests while working in Vladimir Putin`s administration who was extracted during the first year of the Trump presidency. There was a consideration, an attempt to extract him before that during the Obama presidency. But there are many elements of this story including what may be now a lack of resources for the CIA for information coming from inside the Putin regime.
SCHIFF: Well, I can`t comment on those specific allegations. I can tell you that really our mission on the Intel Committee is to make sure the intelligence committee has the resources it needs to do the difficult human intelligence work. Russia is a very hard target. There are other hard targets out there. And we spend a lot time assessing are we able to get the information we need? What changes do we need to get more information? There are several reports, and I can`t comment on the specifics of them. But, you know, one of the other reports today was the president continually questioning the value of human intelligence. You know, for the president to do that and send a message if this reporting is correct that these people who are risking their lives in service to this country, these are foreigners often on foreign soil who do so sometimes, yes, for money but other times because they believe in America, because they believe in democracy, they want something better for their own country. If this is correct and the president is casting doubt on the value of this, even as he has quite publicly castigated the intelligence agencies, comparing them to Nazis, it means sources are going to dry up, both human sources as well as some of our sister intelligence agencies around the world, who won`t give us their most sensitive information if they think the president can`t be trusted with it. So, there are real world consequences to this perception of the president as being untrustworthy with the intelligence, untrusting of our intelligence agencies, skeptical of the value of intelligence itself. That just makes all of our jobs that much more difficult and the country more vulnerable.
O`DONNELL: Chairman Adam Schiff, thank you very much for joining us tonight. Really appreciate it.
SCHIFF: Thank you.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source